Real Astrology

7/29/2019 Real Astrology

1/13

1

How Real is The Rea l Astrology?

(John Fraw ley, The Rea l Astrology, App rent ice Books, 2000)

Angela Vo ss

John Frawley is a pract i t ioner o f w hat he te rm s t rad i t iona l ast ro logy. A l though never

prec ise ly def ined in h is book, w e understand th is t rad i t ion to be th a t estab l ished m ore or less

def in i t ive ly by the Roman ast ronomer Claud ius Pto lemy in h is Tetrabib los, and subsequent ly

handed dow n v ia the Arabs to t he m edieval W est , cu lm inat ing (som e wou ld say) in the w ork o f

the great 17 t h century Engl ish astrologer, W il l iam Li l ly.

This t radit ion can be useful ly def ined as the af f i l ia t ion of astro logical pract ice, i .e. d iv inatory

judge m ent an d in t erp ret at ion , w it h t he beau t i fu ll y o rdered co sm ic vi sion o f Ar ist o t eli an nat u ral

sciencea m odel aris ing fro m t he observat ion of the seven planets in their per fect spher es fro m

th e standp oint of a cent ral (and stat io nary) Earth . For the classical phi losophers and

ast ronomers, th is v is ion revea led a d iv ine order o f c reat ion , the movements o f the p lanets

paral le led by events on earth in an intr icate system of corresponden ce and sym pathy. The

neoplatonist Plot inus would describe the whole system as a cosmic bal let , each part moving in

harmony wi th a l l o ther par tsand the wise man as the one who in any one th ing cou ld read

another , tha t is, w ho cou ld un derstand t he s ign i f icat ion o f heaven ly m ovement s as ind ica t ions o f

Divine intel l igence at w ork. The neoplat onic posit ion is e legant and clear; th e stars have no w il ls,

they are supremely ind i f fe rentbu t hum ans m ay read the i r pa t te rns as they m ight read a f ligh t

of b ird s in the sky, as om ens or indicat ions of present circum stances or fut ure events. Plot in us

rejects the astrologers at t r ibut ion of materia l characterist ics to the planets, such as

temperament , gender, benef ic i ty o r male f ic i tythey serene ly fo l low the i r courses, and i t is

hum an be ings w ho tend to l i te ra l ise and ident i fy them w i th par t icu lar qua l it ies as they observe

correspond ing e f fects in the ear th ly r ea lm.Both Aristot le s ordered heavens and Plot inus cosmic vis ion were adopted by Christ ianity;

the Pr ime Mover, se t t ing the Un iverse in mot ion became God speak ing th rough the symbol ic

language of h is creat ion, astro logy then being the sacred art of r eading in the book of God to

ascerta in His w i l l . From a Stoical perspect ive, the great machine of dest iny groun d on, and a

complex language o f in terpre ta t ion arose wh ich enab led the ast ro loger to observe the exact

qua l i t ies o f any m om ent in t im e f rom p lanetary m ovement s. Th is is the s tar t ing po in t o f Frawley s

t rad i t iona l ast ro logy: In His in f in ite w isdom , he sta tes, the A lm ighty has shaped a un iverse


2/13

2

that f i t s together in coherent fash ion. Not t he least o f t he m any de l igh ts o f the study o f ast ro logy

is the chance to marvel at the precision and intr icacy of th is construct ion as i t turns. (120). The

art o f horary ast ro logy, per fected by t he Arabs, a rose f rom th is concept ion ; fo r i f a quest ion w as

put to the ast ro loger , the very moment o f the quest ion wou ld be re f lec ted in the current

pos i t ions o f t he heaven ly bod ies and there fore i t cou ld be answ ered by re ference to ho w these

bod ies w ere m oving. Accord ing to the same way o f th ink ing, the mom ent o f b i r th (and

concept ion) were o f fundamenta l importance in de termin ing an ind iv idua l s character , and

w ould th en se t the hor oscope o f the person fo r l i fef uture events be ing show n by th e ab i li ty o f

the ast ro loger to look ahead a t the inev i tab le com ings and go ings o f t he p lanets in re la t ion to th is

b luepr in t .

Al l th is could be accom m odated w ith in t he w orld view of th e Christ ian astr ologer, as long as i t

a l lowed for human f reewi l l and cho ice wi th in the pat te rn orda ined by God. The prob lem arose

w hen ast ro logersenchanted by the pred ic tab le unfo ld ing in t ime o f th e cosm ic cycles saw th is

unfo ld ing as a f ixed and determined system wi th in wh ich abso lu te judgments cou ld be made

about th e hum an sou l , and so a tw ofo ld concept ion o f ast ro log ical in f luence arose. Natura l

ast ro logy observed the corre la t ion o f cosm ic movement s wi th t he natura l wo r ld and the hum an

body, therefore legit imising medical astro logy, and was acceptable to the Church as i t d id not

encroach on the t e rr i to ry o f the im m orta l sou l . Jud ic ia l ast ro logy how ever was more suspect , i f i t

sought to subjugate hum an wil l to th e stars. Any Christ ian form o f t radit ional , Stoical astro logy,desp i te us ing (what appears to be) a determin is t language, must p reserve both the u l t imate

author i ty o f a supreme God whose wi l l is a lways super io r to any human judgement , and the

autonom y o f the hum an sou l to f ind f reedom in do ing th is w i l l rather t han tha t o f t he stars ; in

Frawley s wor ds, the A lm ighty is never bo und by ast ro logy and w i l l in te rvene as h is wisdom sees

f i t (124). The im plicat ion is that astro logy m ay aid hum an beings in r ising above a fated

existence by becoming conscious of i t and therefore having some power to change what is

wri t ten in the stars ; indeed Frawley argues that by showing clearly and dispassionately the

rea l i ty o f our si tua t ion , [ast ro logy] is a powerfu l too l wi th w h ich we m ay acqu i re [ f ree w i l l ] . He

asserts t rad i t iona l ast ro logy is one o f t he few pathw ays tow ards [ f ree wi l l ] th a t a re s t i l l open in

the m odern w or ld (188) . He (a long w i th Li l ly) wou ld argue tha t t he stars show , they do not

compel , in o ther w ords, the reve la t ion o f an ind iv idua l s pa th o f good for tune (and path to God)

is there to be taken up th rough h is or her ow n cho ice .

This is a l l by way of introduct ion to John Frawleys manifesto of t radit ional ism in astrology,

The Real Astro logy. In th is review essay I hope to show the l im itat io ns of h is approach. I m ust

how ever stress at th e out set that I am not cr i t ic ising classical astr o logy in i tself , w hich m ay indeed


3/13

3

provide a f i rm structure (the bones, as i t were) for oracular insight, but the issues that arise

w h e n any system ised body of thought is taken to reveal the im m utable Trut h for a l l beings.

For Frawley, [ th is] system represents t ruth, the real cosmological order (64); interpret ing the

cosm os revea ls the supreme t r u th (61), and fu r t herm ore, the w ho le purpose o f ast ro logy is to

lead us to God (67). In fact Fraw ley goes so far as to assert w e can have an astro logy only wit h in

the revealed fa iths (126)i.e. , a l l modern forms of astro logy, psychological and otherwise,

wh ich do not locate themselves wi th in a monothe is t ic model a re deemed to be rubb ish (2 ) .

Now i t is undoubted ly t rue t ha t some m odern pract i t ioners , as t rad i t iona l ones, are not very w ise

or exper iencedand may even be mis taken in the i r understand ing and judgementsbut to

asser t t ha t a l l m odern ast ro logyis i tself at fault is a gross, l imited and distort ed assump tion about

the nature o f symbol and i ts power to m ove the sou l .

At th is point we must remind ourselves that astro logical omen reading arose in the pagan

cultur es of ancient M esopo tam ia and Babylon long befor e the classical Greek and Rom an

system atisat ion o f th e cosm os. For t housands of years hum ans led their l ives by th e stars, seeing

them as gods or spir i ts, asking for guidance, making sacri f ic ia l of ferings to obtain good fortune.

Frawley may be r ight in h is cla im that the meanings associated with planets and constel lat ions

were d iv ine ly revea led in a myster ious waybut th is cer ta in ly does not depend on a

m onothe is t ic m odel . The ear ly ast rono m er/ ast ro logers negot ia ted w i th the sky gods, they

part ic ipa ted in a po ly the is t ic cosmos o f many autonomous powers, any o f whom, a t any t ime,m ight be im petr ated to bestow their b lessings. They certa in ly sensed unseen w orld s behind th is

one, bu tand most important lythey knew that they themselves were impl ica ted in a l l r i tua l

acts that w orking w ith t he stars w as an act of r e lat ionship, an I - thou experience, not a rat io nal

act o f app l ied techn ique.

Al l th is was swept away, however, by the high degree of object iv i ty and l inear causal i ty that

natural science has brought to astrology, and for Frawley, any sense of secret mutual

connivance (to quote C.G.Jung) between the astrologer and his symbols is total ly d isparaged.

The astrologer becom es the al l-seeing, object ive observer of the pr ecepts that Divin i t y la id dow n

for m ans behav iour (19), and any o t her m eans o f com m unicat ing , com m uning, conversing , o r

responding to the heavens is regarded as degenerate, superf ic ia l and self - indulgentand above

al l , t r iv ia l (a w ord that Fraw ley uses at least once on every page). Any tradit io nal system of

thought may eas i ly become b l ind to a l l au thor i ty except i ts own, or may ascr ibe immutab le

autho ri ty t o a set of precept s w hich are seen to be out th ere and invio lable. In th is case, the

autho ri ty is in the stars them selves. Fraw ley understands the m eanings of th e seven planets and

th e tw elve zodiacal images to h ave been revealed direct ly by God; taking an essent ia l ist posit ion,


4/13

4

he argues that t heir pr ist ine m eaning precedes al l mater ia l existence, therefo re th e actual v is ib le

constel lat ions are in some sense fa l len f rom the orig inal puri ty of their immateria l essence (53).

This means that any further addit ions to the scheme (i .e. the three outer p lanets, Uranus,

Neptune and Pluto) can only be human invent ions, g iven arbit rary associat ions, and of no use

whatsoever in an astrological consultat ion ( i t is strange, therefore, that they appear in a l l the

exam ples o f char ts in h is book! ) How ever Frawley qu i te happ i ly acknow ledges tha t the out er

p lanets mark per iods o f t ime wi th the i r o rb i ts , as the inner ones do (45) , so one wonders why

they a re no t a llowed to cont r ibu te to the t im e m om en t qua li t y i n the same w ay.

Now this denial of t he out er p lanet s as ef fect ive symbo ls in astrology raises a serious quest ion

about the very nature o f sym bols and how th ey ar ise . Ast ro logers w ho w ork wi t h the outer

planets know that since they have been t aken up b y the col lect ive consciousness as resonat ing at

an archetyp al level, they w ork in th e chart s of bo th individ uals and events. This is not an

i l lusion, but an expansion of the astrological vocabulary that forms a new patternit does not

deny the e f f icacy o f the o ld pat t e rn , bu t ind ica tes tha t se ts o f o r dered im ages tha t can be used for

divinato ry purpo ses m ay cont inu al ly change and adapt to circum stances. Fraw ley cont ends that

the m eanings assigned to the out er p lanets are arb i t ra ry and w i thout foundat ion , bu t h is th ink ing

show s a rem arkable lack of sym bolic at t i t ude. I f you say a m eaning of Uranus is d ivorce, he says,

then how come so many peop le got d ivorced before i t w as d iscovered? Th is response

demonst ra tes an a lmost unbe l ievab le over- l i te ra l ism and superf ic ia l i ty o f thought wh ich are aha l lmark o f th is book, fo r any idea tha t Fraw ley does not l ike tends to be reduced to an absurd i ty

(such as Plutos only meanin g for m odern astr ologers is sex). I t is not a ltogether surp ris ing that

such a l imited symbolic insight would give r ise to the reject ion of both depth psychological

perspect ives and m agical pract ice, as we shal l see later.

I ronical ly, Fraw leys d iscussion of t he com et Hale-Bopp fa l ls into exact ly th e sam e trap as he

at tem pts to set fo r the supporters o f the out er p lanets . A l though cr i t icising b i t te r ly the choosing

of a rb i t ra ry m eanings fo r Uranus, he announces t r ium phant ly i t w as no surpr ise tha t th is com et s

appearance was soon fo l low ed by th e announcement s o f the c lon ing o f Do l ly th e sheep (128) , as

i f th is event w as som ehow The Tru th o f the com et . No: the symbol ic imag inat ion has m ade an

assoc iat ion bet w een th is par t icu lar event (one out o f m any tha t m ay f i t the symbol ism ) and the

appearance o f th e comet , in exact ly the same w ay as the assoc iat ion w ou ld be m ade betw een

Uranus and revo lu t ion , o r en l igh tenm ent thought . But in ne i ther case do the ce lest ia l

phenom ena determ ine a par t icu lar ou tcome. W hen an ast ro loger takes up a char t fo r a

sign i f icant m om ent , he or she is aw are tha t count less events are happen ing at t ha t m om ent , in

the same p lace but the symbol ism o f t he m om ent t hey choose is sign i f icant (o r m ay be, there is


5/13

5

no guarantee) precisely because they have chosen to engage with i t , not because i t is part of a

pre-orda ined p lan laid out above and beyond the i r ow n par t ic ipat ive enqu iry .

This brings us to the quest ion of self -referencing, on which Frawley throws his accustomed

scorn. I t is t r ue that m odern psychological astr o logy tend s to be concerned w ith inner

m ot iva t ions, com plexes and pat te rns, bu t i t is sure ly r id icu lous to sta te t ha t m odern ast ro logy

dem onstrates an absolut e obsession wit h the in side of ones head , as i f m ind pow ers are l i teral ly

l imited to the physical brain. Indeed doesnt Frawley himself bel ieve that archetypal meaning

precedes manifestat ion in matter? Long before modern psychology the great Renaissance

ast ro loger M arsi l io Fic ino observed, the p lanets are not to be found outs ide , in some o ther

p lace, bu t t he heavens in the i r en t i re ty are found w i th in us, w here the l igh t o f l i fe and or igin o f

heaven dw el l (Le t te r to Lorenzo de M edici the younger). From th is neop la ton ic perspect ive ,

the internal isat ion of the archetypes is seen as a necessary ref lect ion of the macrocosm in the

microcosm of the human sou l , and enab les the ind iv idua l to work const ruct ive ly on a

psychological level to t r ansform so-cal led malef ic inf luences into po sit ive expression. Fraw ley

appears som ew hat confused about th is possib i l i ty : on the on e hand, he upho lds the aut onom y o f

the char tthe char t g ives a c lear and ob ject ive p ic ture wh ich we may choose to ignore but

w h ich w e canno t t ru th fu l l y deny (125 ) and w e le t t he char t m ove in o rde r to f ind ou t w ha t i s

actua l ly go ing to come to pass and w hat w i l l remain as unfu l f i l led potent ia l (119)and on the

ot her, he suggests we can have some po w er to change the pictur e: [ t he chart ] a lso show s just asc lear ly what too ls we have a t our d isposa l to remedy these fau l ts . . . . we can e i ther v iew the

planets in the chart as funct ion s of t he out side wor ld, and suffer t heir consequences, or see them

as a t t r ibu t es o f our o w n sou l and w ork to in t egrate th em (125-6). But i f the char t sta tes clear ly

tha t un fu l f i l led potent ia l w i l l remain as such, how can any in tegrat ive wo rk occur? W el l says

Fraw ley, one views the ascendant as the Ego, and the M oon as the psychic substance of th e

soul (126), and one f inds a possibi l i ty fo r change thr ough exam ining planetary aspects which w il l

show a w ay ou t o f a p rob lem (126 ).

But isn t t h is prec ise ly wh at those dreadfu l moder n ast ro logers do? W el l apparent ly no t , fo r

the i r w ork is reduced in i ts en t i re ty to the ca tegory o f ine f fectua l se l f -help m anua ls; they

present t o t he c l ien t t he p ic ture t hey w ant t o see (instead o f t he t r u th ) , and focus exc lusive ly on

the i r re levance o f ch i ldhood t rauma (22) . What is be ing sought compla ins Frawley, is

primari ly comfort and reassurance (114), as i f the real astro logers job is provide neither of

these th ings but to shock the c l ien t wi th the s tark and unp leasant rea l i ty o f the i r doom-laden

existence. The possible benef i ts of both reassurance and direct ions towards helping oneself are

ignored. Fur therm ore, the w ork o f C.G. Jung on the power o f the symbol to revea l the


6/13

6

unconscious m ot ivat ion or desire , to t urn the soul, is redu ced to an absurd caricature, a t ravesty

of i ts t rue dept h of insight . As for synchronici ty, th is is m erely an elabor ate w ay of saying let s

not th in k about [ p lanetary inf lu ence] at a ll (74). Frawley do es not l ike i t because i t chal lenges his

essent ia l ist posit ion and im plies an irrat ional, perhaps even da imonic in te l l igence a t w ork t ha t has

em barrassingly escaped t he ord er of t he System . For Fraw ley, al l is explained by essence: a pur e,

God-given essence that is refracted t hro ugh th e planetary spheres form ing chains of sym pathy, as

object i f ied neoplatonic resonances that can be rat ional ly apprehended as facts in creat ion.

These essences are the manifestat ions of Gods nature in His creat ion, to be observed by the

astr ologer th rough t he m eanings of th e planets and signs. There is no reason, accordin g to

Frawley, fo r the ast ro loger s psyche to be impl ica ted in any way, and there seems to be no

possible half way posit ion between an object ive means of analysis (115) using an astrology

w hich is in b lack and whi t e on the paper before you (116) and the dum ping o f the ast ro loger s

m ental refu se (115) on the unsuspect ing cl ient. Fraw leys analysis, needless to say, is hardly

borne out by the exper ience o f most modern ast ro logers ( inc lud ing myse l f ) fo r whom an

acknowledgment o f par t ic ipa t ion in the event tha t is the consu l ta t ion is a v i ta l component in

both u nderstand ing the needs o f the c l ien t and the m anner in wh ich adv ice is g iven. But Frawley

w i l l no t l isten . The dreaded synchron ic i ty theory can on ly mean that I f the c l ien t is here now ,

he m ust have bear ing on w hatever ment a l sew age I am current ly w ad ing th rou gh (116) .

One wonders why Frawley regards the (his?) inner l i fe as so toxic, dark and sin ister. Such aview al l too easily g ives r ise to a refu sal to en gage w ith i t at a l l and Fraw ley appeals to t he w ords

of t he Trad it iona l ist Guenon to persuade us tha t w e shou ld not even beg in to d i rect t he l igh t o f

consciousness ont o such a torid m ess. This ra ises seriou s concerns indeed abou t th e

consequences o f ignor ing the un in tegra ted shadow (bo th ind iv idua l and co l lec t ive) and the

wisdom of keeping such a beast tethered underground. I ronical ly Frawley is unable to see that

the dogmatic, Olympian super-structure he has constructed for astro logy is as much a ref lect ion

of h is own unconscious agenda as any God-given, universal t ru th.

Rene Guenon has po in ted out tha t w hat t he m ind keeps unconscious, i t keeps

unconsc ious fo r good reason; i t does not do to go pok ing around in i t . The amo unt

o f psych ic det r i tus we see al l a round us is no t un connected w i th th e tw ent ie th-

century fash ion fo r d o ing just tha t . A l l m anner o f unsavoury gen ies have been

re leased f rom bot t les in w h ich they s lum bered qu i te sa fe ly; they are not easi lyre turned (41).

As i f the r est o f h istory has been im m une f rom unsavoury gen ies? Th is assum pt ion , tha t i t is

possible even to re ta in an unc lu t te red, psych ica l ly imm une perspect ive on t he t r ue nature o f a


7/13

7

cl ient s l i fe (both inner and outer), as i f the astrologer is in fact a remote God and not a human

being at a l l , seem s to be a naive and false under standing of d iv ine know ledge. Fraw ley puts

h im se l f in the pos i t ion o f a pr ophet ; the po in t , as always in ast ro logy, is to look beyond t ow ards

the Div ine . W e shal l show them our po r tents on the hor izons and w i th in th emselves unt i l i t w i l l be

ma n i fest un to them t ha t i t i s t he Tru th (Qur an) (41). But one could argue that the Divine is not

beyond the in terp lay o f ast ro loger and cl ien t ; what cou ld be m ore prophet ic than the pro found

reve lat ion and rea l isa t ion o f w hat w as prev iously unconsc ious t o t he c l ien t in t he depths o f h is

ow n being? The use of sym bols (w heth er astro logical or oth er kinds) in theur gic r i tu al w as to

awaken the sp i r i tua l consc iousness o f t he pract i t ioner pred ic t ing the fu ture w as m ere ly a side-

e f fect o f an expanded and en l igh tened sta te o f insigh t in to the nature o f th ings, beyond the

rea lm o f t im e as w e know i t . Frawley does not acknow ledge tha t h is ow n cond i t ion o f be ing or

consciousness may have any relevance to his pract ice of astro logy, or rather to the kind of

astr ology he has decided is real . I f a l l individu als are expressing their b ir th charts in th eir l ives,

w ith t heir un ique choices and l i fe paths, then even Fraw leys arch enem y Liz Greene wil l be l iv ing

her potent ia l in the best w ay she can. The very fact t ha t Frawley can condem n o thers fo r no t

conforming to h is v is ion o f t ru th is astound ing, when as an ast ro loger the foundat ion o f h is

pract ice rests on the m atching of the ind ividual s natal astr o logy w ith t heir part icular ideals and

w ay o f be ing in the w or ld . Has he never m ade a connect ion betw een h is ow n ast ro log ical

signatur e and the kind of phi losophy and pract ice he is draw n to? I f so, should th is not m ake himto lerant o f t he d i f fe rent k inds o f p ract ices o thers are draw n to , w i th the i r ra ther d i f f e rent char ts?

Ah, but even t ha t in t o le rance is no doubt announced by t he p lanets. ..

Fraw leys at t i t ude to m odern sun-sign astro logy is to be expected. The hel iocentr ic m odel of

the un iverse in i tse l f is regarded as t r iv ia in compar ison wi th the pro found t ru th o f the

geocentr ic model in a spir i tual sense (52) (oddly, th is appears to contradict h is statement

e lsew here tha t one leve l o f t ru th do es not d eny the verac i ty o f another leve l o f t ru t h in respect

to t he dif fer ences betw een astro logical and clock t im e 45). Alan Leo, the founder o f sun-sign

ast ro logy in the ear ly twent ie th century , is accused o f neuter ing ast ro logy, avo id ing p la in ,

accurate judgement in favour of vague character analysis (21). Yet, Frawleys posit ion clearly

acknow ledges tha t the Sun is the m ani fest symbol o f th e Div ine in our cosm os (49), so w hy can

it not then sym bolise the divine spark in the hum an being? I t w ould seem lo gical, in the univer se

of sympathet ic resonance w i th in w h ich the ast ro loger w orks, tha t the in terpre ta t ion o f th e Sun s

m ovem ent a lone shou ld there for e have som eth ing impor tant t o say, metaphor ica l ly , in re lat ion

to sun signs of hu m an beings. A good sun sign astro loger can indeed catch th e f lavour of t he day

in re la t ion to the sun s m ot ion , and th is may wel l r ing t rue wi t h som e readersbut t he t ru th o f


8/13

8

symbolic meaning is just that, i t ar ises in the moment, i t is re lat ional to the immedia te s i tua t ion ,

not f ixed into an infal l ib le stru cture w hich mu st be t ru e for everyone. I f I read a sign which

speaks a t ru th to m e, whether in a sun-sign co lum n or a boo k o f poet ry , who cares if the o ther

tw enty m i l lion Capr icorns in the w or ld see i t as re levant o r no t , at th a t par t icu lar t im e? W hat

stat ist ical analysis of the f a lsi ty o f sun-sign astr ology or t he disdain of a t radit io nal astr o loger

can take aw ay that g l imp se of a coher ent cosmo s in w hich I p lay a part? To reduce th is f leet ing,

but p ow erfu l apprehension o f m ean ing to co inc idence or i l lusion is to fa l l p rey to the dom inance

of a rat ional paradigm that k i l ls qual i tat ive percept ion and denies the s ixth sense that a l l men

have but few use t o quot e Plo t inus.

Interest ingly, Frawley is concerned wi th the moment descr ibed by the ast ro log ica l

sym bol ism , but he sees it f rom w i th in a very st r ic t ly de l ineated m ode o f cosm olog ica l t ime:

W hat ast ro logy doesthat o f w h ich the w ho le cra f t o f ast ro logy consistsis to

descr ibe tha t actua l ind iv idual na ture o f m om ents o f t im e as they ex ist in d i f fe rent

places. The m eans by w hich astro logy achieves th is descript ion is by r eference t othe r elat ive posit ion s of the planet s. This is w hat astrolo gy is, and t h is is a l l that

ast ro logy is : a m eans o f descr ib ing the ind iv idua l na ture o f m om ents o f t im e. (43)

One o f the prob lems wi th th is s ta tement is tha t , aga in , i t assumes an ob ject iv i ty o f past ,

p resent and fu tur e tha t the ast ro loger can sim ply tap in to a t any po in t yet a l l ast ro logers know

th at th ere is absolutely no guarant ee that any chart , for any event, w i l l be radical (that is, show

th e nature of event in i ts symbo lism). Sym bols m ay reveal in a w ay that d isregards al l not ion of

t ime in a l inear sense, l inking qual i t ies of events in d isparate places and widely diverse t ime

perio ds. I f the outcom e of footbal l m atches can be predicted (as Fraw ley suggests) because of

the nature o f the moment a t wh ich the event happens (43) , then, as is o f ten po in ted out by

denigrato rs of astro logy, astr o logers w ould al l be mil l ionaires. But ther e is a get-out c lause:

bear ing in mind tha t a l l th ings a t a l l t imes are sub ject to the wi l l o f God, . . . no mat ter how

inev i tab le m y pred ic t ion m ight seem, w hether b ased on ast ro logy or hor t icu ltu re , i t can a lwaysfai l . (43) So that s a lr ight th en, we preserve the po ssibi l i ty of th e m iraculous inter vent io n, of

God know ing best af ter a l l. But doesnt t h is make a m ockery of th e astro logical art , and set God

f i rm ly apar t f rom His creat ion? Does i t no t im p ly tha t Div ine Reve la t ion m ay in fact have noth ing

to do w i th ast ro logy, and shou ld not be confused wi t h i t? Does i t no t am pl i fy the gu l f be tween

human judgement and d iv ine wil l that Ficino and the Platonists were at such pains to heal, by

acknowledging that there could be no fur ther interpretat ion beyond the god-g iven meaning

discerned by the soul? Frawley and Ficino might agree that predict ion can only occur through


9/13

9

ra t iona l judgement and so may be overr idden by d iv ine reve la t ion , bu t fo r the P la ton is t tha t

reve la t ion is part and parcel of the potent ia l o f the ast ro log ica l symbol , g l impsed by the

in terpre ter th rough a gi f t o f t he sou l w h ich has l i f ted h im or her to a d i f fe rent level o f insigh t

a l together .

Such a d iv inatory approach w ou ld m ain ta in tha t there is no such th ing as a r igh t o r w rong

om en; the sym bol speaks or i t do esnt . The sym bol is em pty u nt i l i t gains signif icance in a cont ext

( is instant iated ). The idea of a pred ict ion fa i l ing is ut t erly a l ien to a m ode of consciousness in

w hich the om ens m ay change f rom m om ent to m om ent : i f you cast a char t fo r a foo tb a l l m atch, i t

is more l ike ly to re fer t o t he dynam ics o f you and you r f r iends cast ing the char t t han any fu ture

event and i ts ou tcom e that a re pre-orda ined. But to fu l ly take th is on board wou ld requ i re le t t ing

go o f t he cher ished not ion o f a Div ine Plan, and adm it t ing to the p ossib i l i ty o f symbo ls themselves

hav ing , o r po in t ing to , a dynamic, au tonom ous energy ( fo r w ant o f a bet te r w ord) . In shor t , w e

f ind ourse lves in the rea lm o f m agic wh ich fo r Frawley is the hot test po t a to in the oven.

For Frawley the very idea o f p lanetary sp i r i ts communicat ing wi th mankind is u t te r ly

unacceptable to the tradit io n (74), b lasphem ous and point less (162). Again w e f ind a str ict ly

uncompromis ing a t t i tude, remin iscent o f S t August ine s condemnat ion o f the ast ro logers fo r

communing wi th demons (even i f they ge t i t r igh t , says August ine , th is is s t i l l due to the

inf i l t rat ion o f evi l spir i ts in their m inds). Despite m ent ion ing Ficino in a posit ive l ight earl ier in h is

book, Frawley here pays no at tent ion to the natural magic of the Renaissance Christ ianastr ologers. Ficinos astral m agic, conducted w ith a piety and rever ence for the l i fe-fo rces of th e

cosmos, is founded on the l i fe-giving and benevolent forces of nature (or super-nature), act ive

throu gh the p lanets, who bestow the g i f ts o f the Divine M ind to hum an be ings. The great p ro ject

of h is reformat ion of astro logy was to redef ine i t as a soul-based act iv i ty (rather than a pseudo-

science) that operat ed thr ough the imaginat ion. Disparaging of those pett y ogres w ho thought

they could predict or prophesy through technique alone, he advocated a divinatory approach to

astrological symbolism which fu l ly engaged the soul-facult ies of the operator, facult ies which

l i f ted h im or her beyond the l imi ta t ions o f ra t iona l in ference or specu la t ion to the rea lms o f

im aginat ion , inspirat ion and the d iv ine frenzy of Plato. I t is th is imaginal realm , the realm of

the symbolic image that l inks divine inte l lect to sense percept ion, that Frawley has dif f iculty in

conceiving as val id. A planetary m agic that cult ivat es the im aginat ion is not about pr edict ion , but

about af f i l ia t ion to the archetypes as l iv ing manifestat ions of cosmic l i fe (the Platonist in Ficino,

but not the Christ ian, would say of d iv ine l i fe). This is undoubtedly the kind of humanist ic

astrology that heavi ly inf luenced those modern pract i t ioners (f rom Dane Rudyhar to Liz Greene)

who Frawley despises, because i t is not about predict ing events, but about heal ing. From the


10/13

10

perspect ive o f t rad i t ion , wh ich depends on a s t rong ra t iona l mind and non-par t ic ipa t ive

in terpre ta t ion (and one might say, cont ro l ) , the autonomous in te l l igence o f the cosmos may

appear th reaten ing. Pure p lanetary fo rce is pow erfu l and hard says Frawley, i f no t im possib le

to regulate (161). He theref ore w arns against ta l ismans and other m etho ds of at t r act ing i t , as i f

i t somehow consists of a materia l inf luence l ike a beam of energy that may cause havoc in ones

l i fe. But quite how d oes th is square w ith th e language of the stars given by God? Is th e

p lanetary fo rce par t o f God s p lan , and i f no t , w here does i t o r ig inate? And how exact ly does one

d i f fe rent ia te betw een p lanetary fo rce and p lanetary sp i r i t ?

Despite r e ject ing the act iv i ty o f cosm ic interm ediaries, Fraw ley happi ly accepts the act iv i ty of

angels as Gods messengers; when Homer describes the intervent ion of Pal las Athena in the

affa irs of m en, he suggests, she m ight w el l be und erstood as an angel by a M usl im, Christ ian or

Jew ; and fu r therm ore, t ransla ted in to ast ro logy, th is becomes a M ercury contact . A l l carry the

same m essage f rom the sam e Source . (49). But wa i t a m inute , weren t p lanetary sp i r i ts

communicat ing wi th mankind u t te r ly unacceptab le to the t rad i t ion? Or is the ana logy

acceptable h ere because M ercury isnt real ly an angel, in a literal sense, but seems likeone? But

vague a l legor isa t ion does not s i t w e l l wi t h t he upho lders o f Trad i t ion fo r w hom ast ro logy is b lack

and w hi te . Fur therm ore, M ercury may be seen as an ange l , bu t he is know n as a da imonby pre-

Christ ian astrologers, and th e da imones have no t ruck wi t h the regu la t ion o f a Suprem e author i ty

tu rning the w heel of dest iny. One senses that Frawley is out o f h is dept h in such mat ters, notleast because the theological constraints he has set h imself s imply cannot accommodate the

experienceof t he l iv ing cosm os.

Another e lem ent o f m agica l ac t iv i ty is tha t o f the d i rect ion o f desi re or in tent ion to ach ieve a

part icu lar ou tcome, wh ich has been g iven a therapeut ic model in the pract ice o f act ive

im aginat ion b y such m etaphysical th inker s as Henry Corb in and Jung. The very w ord desire

derives from de-sidere (f rom the star) and suggests that a fundamental desire of humankind is to

reconnect w i th th e cosm os in som e way. The Arab ic horary pract i t ioners o f ten s ta te tha t the

f i rm er and m ore focussed the des ire o f t he querent , th e clearer and m ore rad ical the char t fo r t he

m om ent w i l l be . Th is apparent responsiveness o f sym bol to in tent ion o f t he mind (Fic ino s

phrase) wou ld seem to be l ie the t rad i t iona l is ts assumpt ion tha t i t is a l l la id out be fore the

ast ro loger independent ly f rom (and o f ten in cont rad ic t ion to ) the c l ien t s o r the ast ro loger s

invo lvement in the m at ter . W hat is a t stake fo r Frawley w hen he asks i f the repa i r m an wi l l a r r ive

on t ime? Has he soul-searched for three days to ascerta in the seriousness his quest ion (as

recomm ended by the Arab ic ast ro logers) and is the m at ter o f d i rect im port f o r the un fo ld ing o f

h is dest iny? Probab ly not , bu t he m ay have had a st ro ng desi re to s tay in the bath tha t m orn ing.


11/13

11

The l imi ta t ion wi th horary , he compla ins, is tha t i t does not work mechan ica l ly . I f the

quest ion abou t m y ba rbecue o r t he w eathe r ove r the summ er w anders in to m y head o f i t s ow n

vo l i t ion , a horary char t w i l l give accura te judgement (140) . But m any thoughts w ander in to

peoples heads about w eather and barb ecues, and m any oth er day to day af fa irs, and i t is hard to

see w hy th ese w andering tho ughts should inevitably g ive r ise to ef f ect ive horaries in a w ay that is

any d i f fe rent f ro m a mechan ica l quest ion , w hatever Frawley m eans by tha t . He fa i ls to see tha t

i t is no t a quest ion o f m echan ist ic o r vo l i t iona l enqu i r ies, bu t t ha t t he sym bol m ay reveal o r

conceal at any mo ment o f in te rpre ta t ion , bu t w i l l be given m ore pow er and impor t by the r i t ua l

procedure of going to the oracle . There is a great danger that interpret ing horaries for oneself

becomes a sol ipsist ic exercise in the guise of object iv i tythe t rue desire may well be more

accura te ly d iscerned by the pos ing o f th e quest ion to the th i rd par ty ast ro loger .

But then Frawley does not seem to grasp the role of desire in astrological judgement and

ef f icacy, us ing the vague and ra ther derogatory ph rase sub ject ive m ood to app ly to t he th ose

inner in tent ions o f the c l ien t wh ich may be comple te ly a t odds wi th the t ru th o f the char t as

seen by the ast ro loger . He gives the exam ple o f som eone w ho dreams o f winn ing the lo t te ry ,

and po in ts out tha t i f there is no ind ica t ion o f sudden w ea l th in the ind iv idua l s na ta l char t , no

tr ansit , progression or r etur n w i l l br ing i t . Because of th is, he cla ims rather simp list ical ly that i t is

possib le fo r t r ad i t iona l ast ro logers to d i f fe rent ia te betw een events in the w or ld and sub ject ive

m oods, (121) un l ike the m oderns w ho apparent ly cla im th is is im possib le . But what m odernastrologer would cla im (unless they were dist inct ly lacking in inte l l igence), that a subject ive

m ood about w inn ing the lo t te ry cou ld actua l ly b r ing i t about? They might how ever observe tha t

appropr ia te act ion a t the r igh t t im e w ou ld be m ore l ikely to ach ieve benef icia l resu l ts , i f i t w ere

accompanied by a s t rong fo rce o f in ten t ion (and F ic ino wou ld say, p rayer or invocat ion to the

presiding deity). I f a Venus transit coincides w ith a new love af fa ir, then Venus and t he love af fa ir

a re exper ienced as two d imensions o f the same archetype, the metaphor ica l and the l i te ra l

aspects of Love. In th is sense they are both dif f erent iated yet un ited it is sim ply not a case of

e i ther-or .

But a more complex issue is ra ised here, which in many ways l ies at the heart of th is books

fund am ental ist re l ig ious stance. Accordin g to Fraw ley, no am ount of Venus transits wi l l coincide

w ith a love af fa ir i f the natal chart s ow n Venus does not pr om ise such an event. How ever, he

does acknow ledge that God s wi l l can overr ide al l astro lo gical indicat ions. But how , exact ly, does

Gods w i l l man i fest? Does i t com e f rom w i thout , as a sudden rupt ure , an overr id ing, revela tory

tr anspor t , present ing the dejected lover w ith th e beauty of h is dream s? Is i t l ike (as Fraw ley

suggests, 124) an in i t iat ion into the Greater M ysteries, who se spir i t ual t ru th goes so far beyon d


12/13

12

the hum an o r lesser m yster ies o f the nata l char t t ha t i t renders i ts sym bols m eaningless? Or

is i t possible that Gods wi l l may in fact be located in the depths of the human soul (as I

suggested ear l ie r ) , tha t p ar t w h ich never separated f r om Him in the f i rs t p lace, and t ha tas the

neop la ton ists taughtm agica l ( theurg ic) p ract ice m ight fac i li ta te the w ork ing o f th is d iv ine pow er

in and thro ugh the w orld , thr ough the raising of human consciousness? In which case, act ive

im aginat ion techniqu es using prayer, invocat ion , intent io n and int ense visual isat ion m ay be seen

to be in aid of a process of d iv in isat ion which would al low human beings to reach a level of

insight, understanding and manifestat ion beyond the fatedness of any astrological judgement.

The str ictures of a badly placed Venus would then fa l l away and the seemingly miraculous and

ardent ly prayed for event m ight occur , d iv ine w i l l (whether God s or th e gods ) merg ing w i th

the sou l s deepest desi re , wh ich is about as fa r rem oved f ro m a sub ject ive m ood as cou ld be

imagined.

No doubt I have over-s impl i f ied complex theo log ica l d is t inc t ions here , bu t wi th Frawley s

inab i li ty t o a l low a po ly the ist ic perspect ive o f an an imate cosm os in t imate ly connected to h um an

desire into his monoli th ic monotheism, we f ind ourselves up against the exoteric-esoteric d iv ide

in re l ig ious th inking t hat has, i ron ical ly, a lw ays dum ped astrology in t he sam e camp as m agic, and

pit ted bo th against ort hodo xy. Only in th is case, astro logy has becom e a bast ion o f t rue Christ ian

prin cip le, oppo sed to the superst i t ion of bo th m agicians and psychologists!

In conclusion, Frawleys insistence that astro logy is a psycho logy or ien ta ted towards theknow ledge o f the Div ine (114) and t ha t a l l o t her p sycho logy is e rr or has ser ious impl icat ions.

He do es not see that in re ject in g an im aginal psychology h e is re ject ing al l po ssibi l i ty o f seeing

himsel f m irro red in th e sym bolic system h e espouses. He does not see that h is astr ology is an

authent ic expression of h is t ru th , no t The Tru th , wh ich undermines, to my v iew, h is very

credibi l i ty as an astrologer. Nor does he see that the Divine is not out there d irect ing a vast

m ach ine o f dest iny but is p resent in every m om ent o f symbol ic insigh t , as a m ul t i tude o f l iv ing,

da imonic connect ions to the cosmos and to the w or ld . The ast ro log ical char t m ay, o r m ay not g ive

r ise to the moment o f rea l isa t ion between symbol and sou l , fo r such a poss ib i l i ty cannot be

pred ic ted or guaranteed. How ever in t r icate t he des ign, how ever pred ic tab le the ast rono m y, the

movements o f the p lanets mean noth ing and por tend noth ing unt i l they are taken up by the

astr ologer as a m eaningful om en and are real ised in l i fe events.

Frawley ends his book with the famous quotat ion from Li l ly s To the students in Astrology in

Christ ian Astro logy: the m ore ho ly thou ar t , and more near to God, the purer Judgement t hou

sha l t g ive . One cannot he lp fee l ing however t ha t Li l ly s understand ing o f t he w ord ho ly adm its a

far g reater hum i l i ty than John Frawley dem onst ra tes in th is book.


13/13

13

Documents

Real Astrology